Support NeoGAF

[Nekki]

Looking at the results on the NPD and UK/Pal charts I disagree. I think the game would crater worldwide.

Wait, what games are you using as an example to base yourself with this?

 

[electroplankton]

Looking at the results on the NPD and UK/Pal charts I disagree. I think the game would crater worldwide.

Looking at the results on the NPD and PAL charts, it seems clear that 3DS is gaining more and more kids, which are the main target for anime tie-in in the West. They brought over the last Naruto game (in retail format), I don't see why a Dragon Ball fighting game shouldn't be in the pipeline.

The biggest hurdle isn't DBZ, I think the 3DS wouldn't be the ideal platform for the game if they are thinking in worldwide sales to get a profit. They should continue to make more 3DS DBZ games, however the budget should allow it to be profitable with the Japan sales only.

Developing such a game would cost close to nothing. It wouldn't even need half a million worldwide to get profitable.

Honestly? Nintendo should clear their production pipeline of these types of games (TC/Brain Training/ETC) these games have way cheaper clones available on mobile platforms and these platforms are so prevalent that Nintendo should move all their production resources to Wii U and Tent-poles 3DS games. I would also do the same with Wii Fit U, I might even suggest canceling that one as the financial risk may be too high with the inventory cost of the scale.

For what concerns Tomodachi Collection, that's a life simulator, a genre that showed great performances on 3DS. Just look at Animal Crossing, but also Fantasy Life and the last Magician's Quest sold relatively well.

The financial risk to develop games like Brain Training and Wii Fit U is so low that Nintendo won't have any problem with them. They are product that must exist on 3DS and Wii U just because they're the successors of DS and Wii. And even if they won't be as big as they used to be, they will still be profitable. Brain Training 4 sold more than 200k units in Japan, just saying.

They are a waste, even more now with the Wii U situation. Nintendo isn't a niche company, they need to aim for big hits/homeruns/moonshots/etc. These types of games are no longer the evergreen forest they used to be, a big publisher like Nintendo needs to be focused and executing properly by putting all their resources where they need them the most. The Wii U needs high impact software, the 3DS has been established and it needs a stable supply of tent-pole releases. I don't see where TC/Brain Training fit in the strategy Nintendo needs to follow.

Those games fit in the strategy perfectly. 3DS is the successor of DS and at a certain degree it tries to aim also to the audiences the DS had. Brain Training, Art Academy, Nintendogs, Style Savvy they must exist, and even though they won't be evergreen as they used to be, they still play a role in the software ecosystem. Also, with the eShop, they could live a second life.

You say it as if they were obligated to try it again with these IPs but they weren't, there was sufficient data to determine these customers are being served better by the app store/mobile games ecosystem, however Nintendo left their own greed to blind them to the obvious.

LM2 will outsell TC worldwide. Do you doubt this? TC is a game that a publisher with a Japan only focus should make, not Nintendo. I also agree they do have several 3DS tent-pole releases schedule and that's all fine but doesn't make TC/Brain Training and Wii Fit U less of a waste of resources and money for a company like Nintendo.

Yes its a waste of resources and money for a little something called Opportunity Cost and focus. Nintendo has 14 billion dollars in cash reserves, they have no need to make small titles to fund big ones. Why is so hard to call a spade a spade?

Also TC has no chance of getting even close to AC 3DS, I think it would outperform expectations if it sells 15% of AC3DS.

Tomodachi Collection will sell well. It'll be advertised a lot, and it's going to be released just before the Golden Week. Of course it won't get close to Animal Crossing (probably even Pokémon won't), but that doesn't mean it will be a waste of money.

The first one on DS sold more than 3.5 million units. It would be beyond stupid to not provide video gamers a sequel.

 

[serplux]

Yes its a waste of resources and money because of a little something called Opportunity Cost and focus. Nintendo has 14 billion dollars in cash reserves, they have no need to make small titles to fund big ones. Why is so hard to call a spade a spade?

Also TC has no chance of getting even close to AC 3DS, I think it would outperform expectations if it sells 15% of AC3DS.

Opportunity cost is the reason why they make these casual titles. They cost very little for them to make, and make them a good amount of profit in return.

While I think TC will decline from its predecessor, I never said it would sell what AC does. It has a good chance at getting over what Paper Mario did, and a decent shot at getting over a million ("breakout seller"), and that's worthy of Nintendo's resources.

Tomodachi Collection will sell well. It'll be advertised a lot, and it's going to be released just before the Golden Week. Of course it won't get close to Animal Crossing (probably even Pokémon won't), but that doesn't mean it will be a waste of money.

The first one on DS sold more than 3.5 million units. It would be beyond stupid to not provide video gamers a sequel.

I think you're underestimating Pokemon.

 

[StreetsAhead]

You say it as if they were obligated to try it again with these IPs but they weren't, there was sufficient data to determine these customers are being served better by the app store/mobile games ecosystem, however Nintendo left their own greed to blind them to the obvious.

LM2 will outsell TC worldwide. Do you doubt this? TC is a game that a publisher with a Japan only focus should make, not Nintendo. I also agree they do have several 3DS tent-pole releases schedule and that's all fine but doesn't make TC/Brain Training and Wii Fit U less of a waste of resources and money for a company like Nintendo.

They're not technically obligated to make sequels to any games. I'm having trouble understanding your argument. Because other development teams/apps/smart phones can and do offer these services/games it's pointless for them to try? If that's it, then I partly agree, but 20 million sales for some of those titles WW says to me it's a no-brainer to try again on new hardware, especially since they're cheap to make.

We have seen a trend of young women (19-24) purchasing the 3DS to play Animal Crossing, which is tracking weeks ahead of its predecessor on the DS. Even Nintendo did not expect this as they were the market with one of the the highest smart phone adoption rates, and most assumed they were lost to traditional consoles. If it hadn't been Animal Crossing it *could* have been something else. The point is you try.

We're yet to see if TC will be localised, although I'm not hopeful.

LM2 *may* outsell TC worldwide, but LM1's WW sales numbers are about the same when compared to TC1's figures in Japan alone.

Tomodachi Collection will sell well. It'll be advertised a lot, and it's going to be released just before the Golden Week. Of course it won't get close to Animal Crossing (probably even Pokémon won't), but that doesn't mean it will be a waste of money.

01. / 00. [NDS] Pokemon Black / White (Pokemon Co.) - 2.557.779 / NEW
01. / 01. [NDS] Pokemon Black / White (Pokemon Co.) - 828.580 / 3.386.358 (-68%)
01. / 01. [NDS] Pokemon Black / White (Pokemon Co.) - 374.589 / 3.761.217 (-55%)

First 3 weeks and already beaten.

 

[thehypocrite]

Wait, what games are you using as an example to base yourself with this?

The fact that nothing that doesn't have Mario on the title seems to make the lists with any regularity.

Looking at the results on the NPD and PAL charts, it seems clear that 3DS is gaining more and more kids, which are the main target for anime tie-in in the West. They brought over the last Naruto game (in retail format), I don't see why a Dragon Ball fighting game shouldn't be in the pipeline.



Developing such a game would cost close to nothing. It wouldn't even need half a million worldwide to get profitable.



For what concerns Tomodachi Collection, that's a life simulator, a genre that showed great performances on 3DS. Just look at Animal Crossing, but also Fantasy Life and the last Magician's Quest sold relatively well.

The financial risk to develop games like Brain Training and Wii Fit U is so low that Nintendo won't have any problem with them. They are product that must exist on 3DS and Wii U just because they're the successors of DS and Wii. And even if they won't be as big as they used to be, they will still be profitable. Brain Training 4 sold more than 200k units in Japan, just saying.



Those games fit in the strategy perfectly. 3DS is the successor of DS and at a certain degree it tries to aim also to the audiences the DS had. Brain Training, Art Academy, Nintendogs, Style Savvy they must exist, and even though they won't be evergreen as they used to be, they still play a role in the software ecosystem. Also, with the eShop, they could live a second life.



Tomodachi Collection will sell well. It'll be advertised a lot, and it's going to be released just before the Golden Week. Of course it won't get close to Animal Crossing (probably even Pokémon won't), but that doesn't mean it will be a waste of money.

The first one on DS sold more than 3.5 million units. It would be beyond stupid to not provide video gamers a sequel.

So just because it sold before it will sell again seems like a misguided mantra that forgets that market dynamics are in constant flux and what was succesful yesterday can fall flat on it's face tomorrow. Companies need to make the products the consumers want, not the ones they want to sell. Nintendo is making these titles because they are relatively cheap to make and if they hit/stick the ROI is off the charts driven by the MSRP of the games. The need of the audiences is inconsequential for their existance and we all know it. The perception I hold is that the audience isn't there anymore and Nintendo is just wasting money with them.

 

[Nekki]

You say it as if they were obligated to try it again with these IPs but they weren't, there was sufficient data to determine these customers are being served better by the app store/mobile games ecosystem, however Nintendo left their own greed to blind them to the obvious.

Obligated to try it again? What the hell are you talking about? If you've had a successful product, why wouldn't you try attaining that success again?? Look at all the countless sequels games get all the time.

And what's this "let their own greed blind them" stupidity? You seriously need to work on your arguments.

LM2 will outsell TC worldwide. Do you doubt this? TC is a game that a publisher with a Japan only focus should make, not Nintendo. I also agree they do have several 3DS tent-pole releases schedule and that's all fine but doesn't make TC/Brain Training and Wii Fit U less of a waste of resources and money for a company like Nintendo.

I hope you are aware that the games in question are games that are cheap to make and have small teams behind them. You, and everybody else, knows Nintendo has their big teams doing the big games. You think freeing the small teams that are creating these games would have a great impact over game development?

Also you're talking about a game that (according to Garaph) sold 3,634,606 units. So even if it ends up selling one quarter of that it will do close to a million. This is going to assuredly be a profitable game.

The fact that nothing that doesn't have Mario on the title seems to make the lists with any regularity.

The top 10 are not the only games that have 'sold' during a month by the way, I hope you know that.

 

[serplux]

They're not technically obligated to make sequels to any games. I'm having trouble understanding your argument. Because other development teams/apps/smart phones can and do offer these services/games it's pointless for them to try? If that's it, then I partly agree, but 20 million sales for some of those titles WW says to me it's a no-brainer to try again on new hardware, especially since they're cheap to make.

We have seen a trend of young women (19-24) purchasing the 3DS to play Animal Crossing, which is tracking weeks ahead of its predecessor on the DS. Even Nintendo did not expect this as they were the market with one of the the highest smart phone adoption rates, and most assumed they were lost to traditional consoles. If it hadn't been Animal Crossing it *could* have been something else. The point is you try.

We're yet to see if TC will be localised, although I'm not hopeful.

LM2 *may* outsell TC worldwide, but LM1's WW sales numbers are about the same when compared to TC1's figures in Japan alone.

Nah, LM2 will definitely outsell TC, if only because I think LM2 has a chance to do 3.5 million or so worldwide (at least more than PM:SS).

And I really doubt TC will be localized. It just doesn't seem like a game that would work here.

 

[electroplankton]

So just because it sold before it will sell again seems like a misguided mantra that forgets that market dynamics are in constant flux and what was succesful yesterday can fall flat on it's face tomorrow. Companies need to make the products the consumers want, not the ones they want to sell. Nintendo is making these titles because they are relatively cheap to make and if they hit/stick the ROI is off the charts driven by the MSRP of the games. The need of the audiences is inconsequential for their existance and we all know it. The perception I hold is that the audience isn't there anymore and Nintendo is just wasting money with them.

The fact that 3.5 million gamers bought and played a game not so many years ago (Friend Collection is a 2009 game) seems a good reason to produce a sequel. I mean, every software house having an IP selling 3.5 million units (I mean, one of the best selling game ever in Japan) would exploit it at least one more time. Is it so unreasonable? In my opinion, no.

Also, the fact that Animal Crossing is selling faster than its predecessor, and it's going to reach the 4 million mark (if not the fifth one...), teaches us two things: Nintendo is still able to re-create the craziness some DS games had, and, more importantly, there's still a market for Tomodachi Collection.

Tomodachi Collection is a life simulator, and other life-sim showed to be able to sell well on 3DS (Fantasy Life, Magician's Quest). If Tomodachi Collection will sell even "just" 500.000 units, would be all profits for Nintendo. How many software houses have games selling over half million units in Japan?

Also, those audiences exist on 3DS.
Just look at the results of games like Nintendogs (+600k units), Style Savvy (+300k units), Art Academy (200k units), Brain Training (200k units). They're not as successful as they were on DS, but they're still successful IPs. Maybe you should look better Japanese charts.

 

[thehypocrite]

They're not technically obligated to make sequels to any games. I'm having trouble understanding your argument. Because other development teams/apps/smart phones can and do offer these services/games it's pointless for them to try? If that's it, then I partly agree, but 20 million sales for some of those titles WW says to me it's a no-brainer to try again on new hardware, especially since they're cheap to make.

We have seen a trend of young women (19-24) purchasing the 3DS to play Animal Crossing, which is tracking weeks ahead of its predecessor on the DS. Even Nintendo did not expect this as they were the market with one of the the highest smart phone adoption rates, and most assumed they were lost to traditional consoles. If it hadn't been Animal Crossing it *could* have been something else. The point is you try.

We're yet to see if TC will be localised, although I'm not hopeful.

LM2 *may* outsell TC worldwide, but LM1's WW sales numbers are about the same when compared to TC1's figures in Japan alone.

Correct, that's my point. You see that part there is how companies get in trouble, you should never allow yourself to be in cruise control/automatic, you never fall sleep at the wheel. AC performace is an unmitigated success and overperforms every expectation, but TC isn't AC, Just because they share the same genre doesn't mean they'll perform equally, if that were the case all the clones would perform like the incumbent and we know that's not the case.

 

[electroplankton]

Correct, that's my point. You see that part there is how companies get in trouble, you should never allow yourself to be in cruise control/automatic, you never fall sleep at the wheel. AC performace is an unmitigated success and overperforms every expectation, but TC isn't AC, Just because they share the same genre doesn't mean they'll perform equally, if that were the case all the clones would perform like the incumbent and we know that's not the case.

Neither the original Tomodachi Collection performed as well as Animal Crossing. So what? I don't understand why a 3.5 million units game shouldn't receive a sequel. Why? If the new entry will sell half million units would still be incredibly successful given how the game is. And it's not Nintendo is not pushing it.

 

[serplux]

Also, those audiences exist on 3DS.
Just look at the results of games like Nintendogs (+600k units), Style Savvy (+300k units), Art Academy (200k units), Brain Training (200k units). They're not as successful as they were on DS, but they're still successful IPs. Maybe you should look better Japanese charts.

I think Nintendogs would've broken a million if it came after Animal Crossing, and everything else would have shifted upwards about 100k or so if it also came after AC. I don't think they were strong enough to stand up by themselves (although Nintendogs did well).

 

[thehypocrite]

Obligated to try it again? What the hell are you talking about? If you've had a successful product, why wouldn't you try attaining that success again?? Look at all the countless sequels games get all the time.

And what's this "let their own greed blind them" stupidity? You seriously need to work on your arguments.



I hope you are aware that the games in question are games that are cheap to make and have small teams behind them. You, and everybody else, knows Nintendo has their big teams doing the big games. You think freeing the small teams that are creating these games would have a great impact over game development?

Also you're talking about a game that (according to Garaph) sold 3,634,606 units. So even if it ends up selling one quarter of that it will do close to a million. This is going to assuredly be a profitable game.



The top 10 are not the only games that have 'sold' during a month by the way, I hope you know that.

The UK/Pal charts get to 40 and that doesn't seems to help them at all. Besides you're talking as If I said I would cancel TC, when I just said Nintendo should clear their production pipeline of these projects, which means they shouldn't bother with them again. I would suggest canceling Wii Fit U though.

The fact that 3.5 million gamers bought and played a game not so many years ago (Friend Collection is a 2009 game) seems a good reason to produce a sequel. I mean, every software house having an IP selling 3.5 million units (I mean, one of the best selling game ever in Japan) would exploit it at least one more time. Is it so unreasonable? In my opinion, no.

Also, the fact that Animal Crossing is selling faster than its predecessor, and it's going to reach the 4 million mark (if not the fifth one...), teaches us two things: Nintendo is still able to re-create the craziness some DS games had, and, more importantly, there's still a market for Tomodachi Collection.

Tomodachi Collection is a life simulator, and other life-sim showed to be able to sell well on 3DS (Fantasy Life, Magician's Quest). If Tomodachi Collection will sell even "just" 500.000 units, would be all profits for Nintendo. How many software houses have games selling over half million units in Japan?

Also, those audiences exist on 3DS.
Just look at the results of games like Nintendogs (+600k units), Style Savvy (+300k units), Art Academy (200k units), Brain Training (200k units). They're not as successful as they were on DS, but they're still successful IPs. Maybe you should look better Japanese charts.

Which means that they all sold a fraction of what they originally did before. Nintendo is a platform holder, they need to aim high, if their goal is to make software that sells 300k units they should should check themselves. If you told me that it was a Eshop game that's fine, but for a retail release? that doesn't cut it anymore and everyone here knows this, as this is same argument levied to other games by platform holders.

 

[electroplankton]

Which means that they all sold a fraction of what they originally did before. Nintendo is a platform holder, they need to aim high, if their goal is to make software that sells 300k units they should should check themselves. If you told me that it was a Eshop game that's fine, but for a retail release? that doesn't cut it anymore and everyone here knows this, as this is same argument levied to other games by platform holders.

I don't understand: now companies shouldn't have smaller games? Must they only have games selling over a million units? That's really a bad argument. Companies need to diversify their offer. Nintendo, like Sony, Capcom, Microsoft, etc. have always had different products, aimed at different audiences, with different production values and different expectations.

Games like Brain Training or Nintendogs cost close to nothing to be produced. They must exist on 3DS because it's the successor of DS, and Nintendo must provide a continuation to its audience. I can agree to some extent that Brain Training now should be more an eShop release, but Tomodachi Collection? Come on, Animal Crossing is there to prove that there exists a market for life-sim, on 3DS.

I think all the other companies would kill to have an IP like TC, or even Style Savvy, or Art Academy.

 

[thehypocrite]

Neither the original Tomodachi Collection performed as well as Animal Crossing. So what? I don't understand why a 3.5 million units game shouldn't receive a sequel. Why? If the new entry will sell half million units would still be incredibly successful given how the game is. And it's not Nintendo is not pushing it.

That's probably cause I didn't comunicated effectively but let me try again from the top.

My assumptions/observations:

Nintendo Wii U is underperforming worldwide.
Nintendo Wii U has a pathetic release schedule.
We agree Software moves hardware.
Wii U has no software right now.
The 3DS is stable and it has tent-pole releases ligned up.

My reasoning/Conclusions:

Nintendo should stop making more games that lack global appeal for the 3DS.
They should start making Wii U software.
Even New Wii U Eshop software would be better for them.
They should focus on High Impact Wii U software as well.
These (TC/BA) games are now a small niche in comparision to what they were.
Nintendo is being greedy as these are games they would like to sell lots and are cheap.
The primary audience for TC/Brain Training is better served by Mobile/Apps store games.
Nintendo needs to align all their resources around their priorities.
I would suggest Nintendo canceled Wii Fit U as it's gonna crater horribly.

I don't understand: now companies shouldn't have smaller games? Must they only have games selling over a million units? That's really a bad argument. Companies need to diversify their offer. Nintendo, like Sony, Capcom, Microsoft, etc. have always had different products, aimed at different audiences, with different production values and different expectations.

Games like Brain Training or Nintendogs cost close to nothing to be produced. They must exist on 3DS because it's the successor of DS, and Nintendo must provide a continuation to its audience. I can agree to some extent that Brain Training now should be more an eShop release, but Tomodachi Collection? Come on, Animal Crossing is there to prove that there exists a market for life-sim, on 3DS.

I think all the other companies would kill to have an IP like TC, or even Style Savvy, or Art Academy.

Why do you have to bring other companies into the conversation? their situation isn't Nintendos situation and you know it, I'm referring to Nintendo, they shouldn't bother anymore to make games that are japan centric, they are a global platform holder/publisher and their games need a global outlook.

 

[serplux]

Which means that they all sold a fraction of what they originally did before. Nintendo is a platform holder, they need to aim high, if their goal is to make software that sells 300k units they should should check themselves. If you told me that it was a Eshop game that's fine, but for a retail release? that doesn't cut it anymore and everyone here knows this, as this is same argument levied to other games by platform holders.

Not all of their games have to be sell millions upon millions. If the only point in making a game was to be a system seller, we wouldn't have Metroid, Kirby, Kid Icarus, Fire Emblem, Pikmin, Wario, Sin and Punishment, Star Fox, Punch-Out, Advance Wars, Golden Sun, F-Zero, Wave Race, and the like. And nearly all of these franchises are smaller than Tomadachi Collection (in terms of sales).

 

[StreetsAhead]

Correct, that's my point. You see that part there is how companies get in trouble, you should never allow yourself to be in cruise control/automatic, you never fall sleep at the wheel. AC performace is an unmitigated success and overperforms every expectation, but TC isn't AC, Just because they share the same genre doesn't mean they'll perform equally, if that were the case all the clones would perform like the incumbent and we know that's not the case.

They're asleep at the wheel because they created sequels to multi-million selling franchises?

I could understand if they'd announced a sequel to Fossil Hunters, but a game that sold 3.5 million?

Also, how do you *know* TC won't be a success? Maybe it'll sell 2 million, maybe it'll sell 4. It's nothing to do with the genre and everything to do with looking at past performance.

Which means that they all sold a fraction of what they originally did before. Nintendo is a platform holder, they need to aim high, if their goal is to make software that sells 300k units they should should check themselves. If you told me that it was a Eshop game that's fine, but for a retail release? that doesn't cut it anymore and everyone here knows this, as this is same argument levied to other games by platform holders.

So they should stop making games like Kid Icarus, Fossil Hunters, Sin & Punishment 2, and Xenoblade?
Part of being a platform holder means you can take those risks and release the smaller, more niche games. Not everything needs to sell 1+ million (or whatever your arbitrary cut-off is) for a publisher to be considered healthy/successful.

Even New Wii U Eshop software would be better for them

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpg8O4k0_Rw

*Download cards available in stores, too.

 

[thehypocrite]

Not all of their games have to be sell millions upon millions. If the only point in making a game was to be a system seller, we wouldn't have Metroid, Kirby, Kid Icarus, Fire Emblem, Pikmin, Wario, Sin and Punishment, Star Fox, Punch-Out, Advance Wars, Golden Sun, F-Zero, Wave Race, and the like. And nearly all of these franchises are smaller than Tomadachi Collection (in terms of sales).

All of those should be relegated to hanheld Eshop products, not retail releases.

They're asleep at the wheel because they created sequels to multi-million selling franchises?

That's not my point and you know it, I don't understand why you are reducing the argument to that when you know that's not the point.

I could understand if they'd announced a sequel to Fossil Hunters, but a game that sold 3.5 million?

Also, how do you *know* TC won't be a success? Maybe it'll sell 2 million, maybe it'll sell 4. It's nothing to do with the genre and everything to do with looking at past performance.

Maybe I'll hit the lotto tomorrow but you and I know that both are rather unlikely scenarios.

So they should stop making games like Kid Icarus, Fossil Hunters, Sin & Punishment 2, and Xenoblade?
Part of being a platform holder means you can take those risks and release the smaller, more niche games. Not everything needs to sell 1+ million (or whatever your arbitrary cut-off is) for a publisher to be considered healthy/successful.

They should be Eshop games for Wii U/3DS and have a budget in accordance to that and created by some hired teams to work on it instead of their inhouse developers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpg8O4k0_Rw

Yep that, they shoud sell them inside a pokeball for maximum profit.

 

[serplux]

All of those should be relegated to hanheld Eshop products, not retail releases.

 

[StreetsAhead]

They should be Eshop games for Wii U/3DS and have a budget in accordance to that and created by some hired teams to work on it instead of their inhouse developers.

Really?

Apart from the fact that most of those were contracted out, at least in part, really?
Again, the sign of a healthy publisher, in my opinion, is that they have numerous genres and titles at retail represented, not relegating niche stuff to purely downloadable games.

What is your cut-off for eshop/downloadable vs. retail in terms of sales and how do you propose they go about determining that prior to release? Why does, for example, AC get a free pass (esp. after the Wii games' flop) but Friend Collection does not?

Yep that, they shoud sell them inside a pokeball for maximum profit.

They kind of are...
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=523215

 

[Nekki]

The UK/Pal charts get to 40 and that doesn't seems to help them at all. Besides you're talking as If I said I would cancel TC, when I just said Nintendo should clear their production pipeline of these projects, which means they shouldn't bother with them again. I would suggest canceling Wii Fit U though.

UK is only one country and not all the PAL charts give much information. Of course, i'm not going to be blind and say Nintendo is doing great in Europe, but it's also not as what you say. In the US NPD gives a very limited view of the market. And the eShop is probably a profitable venue nowadays, by what margin I cannot tell you though.

Also I never suggested you meant you'd cancel TC, but you are indirectly implying that with your argument, you know?

Which means that they all sold a fraction of what they originally did before. Nintendo is a platform holder, they need to aim high, if their goal is to make software that sells 300k units they should should check themselves. If you told me that it was a Eshop game that's fine, but for a retail release? that doesn't cut it anymore and everyone here knows this, as this is same argument levied to other games by platform holders.

Um... you know ALL companies do this, right?? Look at Sony with Patapon, Gravity Rush, Tokyo Jungle. In the US, you have the example of XSEED. Look at how The Last Story did for them.

Hell, most niche japanese publishers live off of their business which is driven in this way.

Your mindset is of the "big budget" and "blockbuster AAA" game or bust, and that can hurt a company WAY more than making small titles, as you imply.

 

[thehypocrite]

Really?

Apart from the fact that most of those were contracted out, at least in part, really?
Again, the sign of a healthy publisher, in my opinion, is that they have numerous genres and titles at retail represented, not relegating niche stuff to purely downloadable games.

What is your cut-off for eshop/downloadable vs. retail in terms of sales and how do you propose they go about determining that prior to release? Why does, for example, AC get a free pass (esp. after the Wii games' flop) but Friend Collection does not?



They kind of are...
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=523215

I would do a checklist:

Can it appeal to a wordwide audience?
Can it support the cost of what it takes to meet the expectation is a post HD/Retina world?
Can the initial sell to retailers put the project in the black?
How much probability it has of selling hardware?
How much probability it has of selling the print of copies?

I would use the Acti-Blizzard template and add a provision about moving hardware.

Also that Pokemon game is gonna print them money.

 

[Nekki]

All of those should be relegated to hanheld Eshop products, not retail releases.

Whew, thank god. Now I know not to take you seriously and leave this discussion alone!

 

[thehypocrite]

UK is only one country and not all the PAL charts give much information. Of course, i'm not going to be blind and say Nintendo is doing great in Europe, but it's also not as what you say. In the US NPD gives a very limited view of the market. And the eShop is probably a profitable venue nowadays, by what margin I cannot tell you though.

Also I never suggested you meant you'd cancel TC, but you are indirectly implying that with your argument, you know?




Um... you know ALL companies do this, right?? Look at Sony with Patapon, Gravity Rush, Tokyo Jungle. In the US, you have the example of XSEED. Look at how The Last Story did for them.

Hell, most niche japanese publishers live off of their business which is driven in this way.

Your mindset is of the "big budget" and "blockbuster AAA" game or bust, and that can hurt a company WAY more than making small titles, as you imply.

Remember that this isn't the Wii era, Nintendo Needs, Needs high impact software to move the Wii U, nothing else will cut it so these small games/limited appeal is as effective as using a bandaid on a shotgun wound, nah is probably less effective than that, is like applying the bandaid in the area that's not wounded while the injured gasps trying to hold his guts from spilling out.

 

[ohlawd]

Whew, thank god. Now I know not to take you seriously and leave this discussion alone!

"handheld eShop products" is a total insult to Kid Icarus: Uprising and Fire Emblem: Awakening, as strange as that sounds.. The other ones don't have a 3DS game so I don't count them.

Tonight is messed up.

 

[thehypocrite]

Whew, thank god. Now I know not to take you seriously and leave this discussion alone!

Maybe not all of them (I have a soft spot for Metroid) but I do think those limited appeal games should get that treatment, is even better than the one they are getting now being relegated in the broken toys/memoir shelfs.

Would you prefer no games or for them to become part of the eshop games?

 

[StreetsAhead]

I would do a checklist:

Can it appeal to a wordwide audience?
Can it support the cost of what it takes to meet the expectation is a post HD/Retina world?
Can the initial sell to retailers put the project in the black?
How much probability it has of selling hardware?
How much probability it has of selling the print of copies?

Which franchises that Nintendo owns fills all those criteria, in your opinion?

 

[saichi]

So just because it sold before it will sell again seems like a misguided mantra that forgets that market dynamics are in constant flux and what was succesful yesterday can fall flat on it's face tomorrow. Companies need to make the products the consumers want, not the ones they want to sell.

Whenever a company releases a product, the company always thinks the product is what the consumers want. No company can always correctly predict what consumers want and it will only be found out AFTER the product is released.

In addition, based on your point, FE:A or KI:U are just a waste of time since it only sells 300k. Also, AC:NL shouldn't be released since the market changed. Or you predicted that AC:NL was gonna be a success?

 

[thehypocrite]

Which franchises that Nintendo owns fills all those criteria, in your opinion?

Franchises? Zelda, Mario Kart, 3D Mario, New Super Mario Brothers, DK, AC. That's a solid foundation that they should try to expand thier catalog, X is a step in the right direction, have retro work on a new IP.

Whenever a company releases a product, the company always thinks the product is what the consumers want. No company can always correctly predict what consumers want and it will only be found out AFTER the product is released.

In addition, based on your point, FE:A or KI:U are just a waste of time since it only sells 300k. Also, AC:NL shouldn't be released since the market changed. Or you predicted that AC:NL was gonna be a success?

Not really, when EA created Medal of Honor Warfighter you thought they created the product people wanted or they were chasing after the consumers they wanted? The 1st one had a realistic campaign, grounded and relatable, the sequel was another try to cater to the COD audience while not being better than COD or having none of it's strength.

Likewise with SimCity. They created the game they wanted to sell, the audience never asked for the online only. If you think AC is anything like TC/BT I have no arguments to offer you. I don't think that there're many games out there with more content and more depth than AC3DS. These are very rich, very deep and very focused games that have great accessibility, I cannot say the same for TC/BT. If you think they're equal I'll disagree with you. I also didn't predict anything for AC3DS and I don't see what it has to do with this topic.

 

[StreetsAhead]

Franchises? Zelda, Mario Kart, 3D Mario, New Super Mario Brothers, DK, AC. That's a solid foundation that they should try to expand thier catalog, X is a step in the right direction, have retro work on a new IP.

Except NSMBU/2 have failed to 'sell hardware' relative to their predecessors and hardly match up to HD expectations of many people, and the HD thing could apply to DK and AC too. Zelda's sales are down in Japan.

X barely even made a blip in the radar in Japan.

 

[thehypocrite]

Except NSMBU/2 have failed to 'sell hardware' relative to their predecessors and hardly match up to HD expectations of many people, and the HD thing could apply to DK and AC too. Zelda's sales are down in Japan.

X barely even made a blip in the radar in Japan.

Maybe the game doesn't meets the expectations of consumers? The franchise is just a tool, at the end of the day the execution needs to complement the IP in order to get the expected results. I think you're trying to make a point here, I just don't know which.

 

[StreetsAhead]

Maybe the game doesn't meets the expectations of consumers? The franchise is just a tool, at the end of the day the execution needs to complement the IP in order to get the expected results. I think you're trying to make a point here, I just don't know which.

To put it clearly my point is:

1. As a platform holder Nintendo has the opportunity to support smaller (cheaper) games at retail and as downloadable titles. Sony does a similar thing with things like Gravity Rush, Teraway, Knack, and Journey. So long as these games remain profitable, people enjoy them, and they don't impede the development of other successful titles, what does it matter? Even with collapsed sales, these games are doing decent numbers in Japan.
2. Moving, what you deem, non-successful retail franchises to outsourced teams for download-release only is short sighted. AC's success was not only not foreseen by Nintendo, it's selling to markets they didn't expect it to either. After the Wii games's poor sales in Japan, it might have been moved to that form of development under you proposed criteria.
3. Making only games that fit your criteria is not only very difficult, but while you say you want them to develop new franchises, many of those franchises you said could continue are either breakout hits or required several entries before becoming really popular. Again, Animal Crossing wasn't big on the N64 or Gamecube.
4. At the same time, even if market pressures have changed, not making sequels to games that sold multi-millions is just ludicrous, at least once. In 2013 most of those big hits from DS have already got sequels now anyway and they'll probably need to start doing something new for the next 2-4 years.
5. Wii U has 2 first-party games released so far. I think it's too early in the cycle to really judge how it will play out long term, but I will admit it isn't looking good. Who's to say that DKCR or Mario Kart on Wii wasn't just as much of a fluke as any of the cheaper titles you're seemingly so against Nintendo making?

 

[L Thammy]

Wait, so this argument is that Nintendo should just drop all of their casual franchises and then not make any new ones? Customers need to be drawn in and high cost games carry more risk. Download-exclusive sequels to popular franchises in a Japan sales thread? I'm confused.


Speaking of confusion. Is there any good source to find Japanese opinions on games? I had thought Pirate Warriors was supposed to have the best movesets of the franchise. What's the difference between a good Musou and a bad one?

 

[extralite]

Is there any good source to find Japanese opinions on games?

If you have access to Famitsu, it has customer reviews for games that came out a few weeks ago. Those list good and bad points with the number of customers who mentioned it.

I think those customer reviews are actually more interesting than the official Famitsu ones.

 

[BishopLamont]

Wait, so this argument is that Nintendo should just drop all of their casual franchises and then not make any new ones? Customers need to be drawn in and high cost games carry more risk. Download-exclusive sequels to popular franchises in a Japan sales thread? I'm confused.


Speaking of confusion. Is there any good source to find Japanese opinions on games? I had thought Pirate Warriors was supposed to have the best movesets of the franchise. What's the difference between a good Musou and a bad one?

He wants Nintendo to basically be Activision or EA, very stupid.

 

[electroplankton]

Fire Emblem: Awakening also brought more than $ 5 million through DLC. But yeah, it's just not very reasonable to think Nintendo should not produce smaller games, also because those games are probably those with higher profits.

 

[Chris1964]

There are games you know they'll underperform from miles away. Tomodachi isn't one of them. Console, install base, target audience and timing seem perfect for it.

 

[Usobuko]

Fire Emblem: Awakening also brought more than $ 5 million through DLC. But yeah, it's just not very reasonable to think Nintendo should not produce smaller games, also because those games are probably those with higher profits.

Was that Japan only or worldwide? Pretty impressive either way.

 

[frankie_baby]

Was that Japan only or worldwide? Pretty impressive either way.

japan only

 

[Lexxism]

Wow. That's a lot of money from DLC.

 

[Shahed]

I took thehypocrite not to mean they shouldn't make stuff like Tomadatchi. Just that they shouldn't make them now.

3DS is flourishing. Sure you can make more money on it, but for now it isn't in any dire need of software. However Wii U is struggling, and maybe Nintendo would be better served by allocating more resources towards Wii U than 3DS for now. 3DS can take care of itself, Wii U can't so it needs all the software it can get. When Wii U shows signs of revival, then make the 3DS software. Put resources where they are more necessary for long term gain over more short time financial return.

Not that I agree or disagree with the point, just that was the impression I got

 

[D-e-f-]

All of those should be relegated to hanheld Eshop products, not retail releases.

They should be Eshop games for Wii U/3DS and have a budget in accordance to that and created by some hired teams to work on it instead of their inhouse developers.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

I heard people were talking smack about Sin & Punishment 2 in here.

 

[StreetsAhead]

I took thehypocrite not to mean they shouldn't make stuff like Tomadatchi. Just that they shouldn't make them now.

3DS is flourishing. Sure you can make more money on it, but for now it isn't in any dire need of software. However Wii U is struggling, and maybe Nintendo would be better served by allocating more resources towards Wii U than 3DS for now. 3DS can take care of itself, Wii U can't so it needs all the software it can get. When Wii U shows signs of revival, then make the 3DS software. Put resources where they are more necessary for long term gain over more short time financial return.

Which is a fine and dandy point, but ignores that fact that not a single one of Nintendo's EAD teams have a currently announced game for 3DS, except for Tomodachi Collection. The teams that we do know are on 3DS are mainly either small (Monster) or traditionally handheld exclusive teams (Game Freak, Alpha Dream).

While they may still be working on projects at EAD, and one would assume that they are, it does seem that they're largely focused on the other console now.

 

[electroplankton]

I took thehypocrite not to mean they shouldn't make stuff like Tomadatchi. Just that they shouldn't make them now.

3DS is flourishing. Sure you can make more money on it, but for now it isn't in any dire need of software. However Wii U is struggling, and maybe Nintendo would be better served by allocating more resources towards Wii U than 3DS for now. 3DS can take care of itself, Wii U can't so it needs all the software it can get. When Wii U shows signs of revival, then make the 3DS software. Put resources where they are more necessary for long term gain over more short time financial return.

Not that I agree or disagree with the point, just that was the impression I got

I don't think 3DS games development is taking away resources from Wii U. Game Freak, Camelot, Alpha Dream, etc. are typically handheld oriented teams. The next handheld Zelda could well be Grezzo's, also focused on handheld. It's never a good idea to leave uncovered a platform, anyway.

 

[frankie_baby]

I don't think 3DS games development is taking away resources from Wii U. Game Freak, Camelot, Alpha Dream, etc. are typically handheld oriented teams. The next handheld Zelda could well be Grezzo's, also focused on handheld. It's never a good idea to leave uncovered a platform, anyway.

isnt grezzo doing wind waker hd at the moment?

 

[DaBoss]

isnt grezzo doing wind waker hd at the moment?

We don't know who is doing it.

 

[saichi]

Not really, when EA created Medal of Honor Warfighter you thought they created the product people wanted or they were chasing after the consumers they wanted? The 1st one had a realistic campaign, grounded and relatable, the sequel was another try to cater to the COD audience while not being better than COD or having none of it's strength.

Likewise with SimCity. They created the game they wanted to sell, the audience never asked for the online only. If you think AC is anything like TC/BT I have no arguments to offer you. I don't think that there're many games out there with more content and more depth than AC3DS. These are very rich, very deep and very focused games that have great accessibility, I cannot say the same for TC/BT. If you think they're equal I'll disagree with you. I also didn't predict anything for AC3DS and I don't see what it has to do with this topic.

1. If a game sells, it's what consumers want. Every company wants to make a game that sells.

2. On SimCity part, wtf is that supposed to mean? EA made a SimCity game that consumers want which is why people were buying it (EDIT: biggest SimCity launch ever) and causing the server issue. If EA released the SimCity with Online and no one is buying it, then you have a point.

3. On AC:NL part, people were doubting about AC3DS before it was released, just like you are doubting TC now. That's why it's related. How do you know AC 3DS is what consumers want but TC is not? Based on what criteria other than your personal opinion?

 

[frankie_baby]

We don't know who is doing it.

could've sworn it was grezzo but my memory is screwed generally

 

[electroplankton]

1. If a game sells, it's what consumers want. Every company wants to make a game that sells.

2. On SimCity part, wtf is that supposed to mean? EA made a SimCity game that consumers want which is why people were buying it and causing the server issue. If EA released the SimCity with Online and no one is buying it, then you have a point.

3. On AC:NL part, people were doubting about AC3DS before it was released, just like you are doubting TC now. That's why it's related. How do you know AC 3DS is what consumers want but TC is not? Based on what criteria other than your personal opinion?

Did Tomodachi Collection preorders start strongly? I saw that the bundle is already soldout on Amazon (not that means too much).

 

[lunchwithyuzo]

Which is a fine and dandy point, but ignores that fact that not a single one of Nintendo's EAD teams have a currently announced game for 3DS, except for Tomodachi Collection. The teams that we do know are on 3DS are mainly either small (Monster) or traditionally handheld exclusive teams (Game Freak, Alpha Dream).

While they may still be working on projects at EAD, and one would assume that they are, it does seem that they're largely focused on the other console now.

Tomodachi Collection isn't even EAD, it's SPD.

Here's EAD's lineups this gen:

Nintendo 3DS
-Nintendogs + Cats
-Steel Diver (with Vitei)
-The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D (with Grezzo)
-Star Fox 64 3D (with Q-Games)
-Super Mario 3D Land
-Mario Kart 7 (with Retro Studios)
-New Super Mario Bros. 2
-Animal Crossing: New Leaf
-Flipnote Studio 3D

Wii U
-New Suoer Mario Bros. U
-Nintendo Land
-Pikmin 3
-Wii Fit U
-The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker
-Mario Kart (new title)
-Super Mario (new title)
-The Legend of Zelda (new title)